3/03/2007

What a bunch of cissies

This thread over at RenEEEEVIL's place is very cisgender centric.

Listen up: All those tests that pit MAN versus WOMAN in fiendish psychological battles to the finish evopsychic's psuedo-scientific interpretations are not relevent until...

A) They can be done on transpeople and the intersex (possibly that should be "people of intersex" or "the intersexed", my terminology ain't too good on them/you, sorry, will try to remedy that in future).

*AND*

B) We can figure out what the results of A-Type tests actually mean.

That's the really fucked up thing about all of those tests you see, we don't really understand the full biological basis of gender or sexuality yet, and even sex, which according to cisgender mythology should be really fucking easy if you'll excuse the pun, is confusing the scientists somewhat.

Because people don't categorise easily, not because we're all special cthulhu spawned Ubermonkees and shit, but because we relish being awkward, and it does make sex very interesting, which I'm sure is rather the point of humans being non-gendered, non-heteronormative and infinitely plethora-sexed.

Most probably, one future day when we're living in a truly "post-gender" world, possibly even a "post-sex" one too, we'll do such tests free of all the rather obvious cultural and social bullshit and discover, surprises of surprises, that variations Within sex/gender categories will be greater than those between sex/gender categories.

Just like we did when we parsed similar tests through a scientifically "post-racial" filter (well, the tests were "post-racial" filters themselves, that was rather the point of them) and found that variations within racial groups was greater than those between them.

One further note: Irregardless of whether what I say is proven true or not, if the ideas here are new to you, if these ideas seem remarkable to you, or if you disagree with this, you are not truly "post-gender", nor have you been in the past, by any sane conception of the term, in fact you are and always have been a big fat/skinny/republican (delete as suits your personal "wouldn't want to be" standards) cisgender biased type person.

Or as I like to call them (or even us, on occasions), a "cissie". I just lurve the irony you see.

You see, "post-gender" doesn't mean not believing in gender roles, rather, it puts everyone as equally trans, or more accurately we are all trannies as inturn none of us are.

You see, Some of us lucked out and fell into a body that cisgender society had a handy label for, and transpeople not only attack those bullshit categories through their behavior, dress, language (body and verbal) and reassignments, they attack the patriarchy that uses those cisgender labels to define who is master and who is slave in the first place. "When Adam delved and Eve span, Who was then the gentleman?" is all well and good, but anyone with eyes to see and wits to learn knows that adam and eve are metaphors, if they're at all relevent, for ends of a sex and gender spectrum that utilises people as markings within the infinitisimal gradients of color that comprises it.

This means, in short, that, for all those socalled "rad" (but deeeply and cissily femme) fems out there, a transperson is more feminist than your pantywasting little nihilistic brand of "feminism" could ever lead you to be.

And that you, who spends so much time agitating against your freaking downpressed betters instead of enemies who you seem very happy to crawl into bed with (literally of course, political lesbianism only goes so far doesn't it eh?), are not fit to lick the freaking boots of the people who you are so ready to deny personhood too.

3 comments:

R. Mildred said...

Metaphorical eyes to see obviously, senses to sense, flanges to flange, shields to modulate, that kind of thing.

Renegade Evolution said...

so very, very true...which is why I love those threads....

Donna said...

This is what I was trying to get at in the Belledame's Axe post at BlackAmazon's (near the bottom of the comments). I want humanity to have a smorgasbord to choose from in defining themselves! Why do the choices have to be black or white and not all the lovely shades in between? Why do we have to overthrow the patriarchy just to be dictated to by the matriarchy? Can't we overthrow both and decide who we are for ourselves? I don't want someone else's rules that say Donna's sex is like this, and her gender is like that, and her race is this way, and her weight and height mean something I decide, etc, etc, etc. What's wrong with asking me how I see myself and everything that makes me who I am?